[Up] [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: St. Margaret

When it comes to recognizing the great historians of the current century,
you will be well up there as a communicator and researcher of the knowledge
of those that came before. Of course I was seeking a context for what Rory
was sharing, and happened to have a friend who is researching masonic
studies with me, so this tied into the Sinclairs and as he is also a student
of Hungarian history, the connection between the Sinclairs and Hungary was
curious for me and the flag seemed to be a link, which you now illustrate
that it is in the historical context you assert. I will be asking my friend
if there are any historical insights from his connections in the
Universities of Hungary. and share it with you.

I must say, that while I have been an avid student of all sorts of history,
what I have come across in this past year is daunting because of the depth
and breadth of the knowledge which is tied into ancient masonry, Sinclairs
as the fulcrum of the keeping of the history and passing it through and the
ancient information in the religions between 2000 BC and 1000 AD that are
buried in the middle east. Bill Bueler is not off the wall in the ancient
geometric principlas that became a basis for much philosophy, theology and
religion to say nothing of the construction of the physical world. I am over
whelmed this year with all the "more" that there is to study just looking at
something a simple as one family heritage and the social impacts that
surrounded  it. Your material is worth posting.

I am so glad that your wisdom is again being communicated. There is so much
you have. Yours aye;

----- Original Message -----
From: "Spirit One Email" <laurel@spiritone.com>
To: <sinclair@matrix.net>
Sent: 8 June, 2000 12:33 AM
Subject: Re: St. Margaret

> Dear Neil,
>     Maybe you intended to way that William the Seemly accompanied St.
> Margaret  back from Hungary?   I  don't mean to jump on to a slip of the
> finger, we all do it.   Here is some new information on the subject that
> people might not know yet.
>    William the Seemly was born around 1028 in Normandy and was in England
> around 1057.  Margaret was born in Hungary in 1046.  It was her father and
> uncle (sons of King Edmund Ironsides) that were forced out of England as
> tiny babies when Knute conquered England and married Queen Emma, sister of
> our Mauger, Count of Mortain & Corbeil, in 1017.
>    So William the Seemly didn't escort her to Hungary, since she wasn't
> yet, but it is quite possible he went with the delegation sent by Edward
> Confessor (s/o Emma) in Sept. 1057 as the king's representative and became
> the cupbearer of Edward the Exile.  It was hoped that Edward the Exile
> become the heir to Edward the Confessor who was childless but  Ed the
> died as he reached England (very suspicious).   William the Seemly's
> Walderne, was the cousin of Edward the Confessor.
>    Margaret was of no political interest and would have been very
> unimportant in the whole picture at that time as she was firmly dedicated
> the church and definitely planned never to marry.  It doesn't make sense
> that this non-person would be entrusted with a piece of the Holy Rood.
> likely (if it ever happened) it would have been given to her father,
> the Exile, by his friend King Andrew of Hungary whom Edward and his
> had helped to regain his throne in Hungary.  Also because of the threat of
> Duke William of Normandy who possessed a Holy relic from the Pope, it
> make sense to give  an important relic such as the Holy Rood to Edward the
> Exile to provide him with Holy power as King of England.
> 20 years passed before she married Malcolm Canmore and then it was against
> her will.  King Malcolm threatened the life of her brother, Edgar the
> Athling, and finally she gave in.  (Anglo-Saxon Chronicles) Women were
> usually wed long before the age of 24 in those days especially a woman
> her lineage.  She was one of the few descendants of the Saxon line of
> monarchs.  Marrying her would have been a strategically good political
> but it is quite evident that such suitors were kept away because of her
> religious commitment.  So it took real force from King Malcolm to change
> mind.
>    I993 was the 900th anniversary of the death of Saint Margaret Queen of
> Scotland.  At least two people researched and published books about her
> life.  No where in either of these books is there a mention of the Holy
> being brought with her from Hungary.  Such a fact would not have been
> overlooked.   I have corresponded with another  English researcher on
> Margaret's history who says, " The other serious problem with your legend
> that Margaret, a girl of about ten in 1057, would hardly have had a Norman
> knight as cupbearer.  Nor is there anything established about a Holy Rood
> brought by Margaret from Hungary.  If your William was indeed Margaret's
> cupbearer then he must have been appointed upon her marriage to Malcolm
> Canmore in Scotland."
> Hope this helps,
> Laurel
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Rory Sinclair <rory.sinclair@accglobal.net>
> To: <sinclair@matrix.net>
> Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 10:13 AM
> Subject: Re: Sinclair Dates & Appreciation
> > Dear Neil:
> > I was leaving the field open to Niven but as he seems otherwise
> I
> > will repeat what I got from him but have seen from no other source (not
> that
> > I have specifically looked).  The engrailed cross, at least in sable
> (black)
> > has been with the Sinclairs a long time.  Niven told me, and I hope I
> > remember correctly, that we Sinclairs obtained  the "ragged cross" after
> > William "The Seemly" St. Clair accompanied St. Margaret (later wife of
> > Malcolm Canmore) to Hungary from which she returned with a piece of the
> true
> > cross which was later enshrined in "Holyrood" (Rood = tree in old
> a
> > version of which was the language spoken in Lowland Scotland  at the
> > to Hungary circa 1057.
> > It may be true that a "croix pattee" or templar cross can be made by
> taking
> > the very centre of an egrailed cross up to the first 'scallop' away from
> the
> > whole but if the above be true re: William the Seemly,  then the croix
> > pattee is an anachronism insofar as the Crusades and hence the Templars
> came
> > appx. 50 years later.
> >
> > I'd like to get to the bottom of this myself.
> > Aye,
> > Rory
> >
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Neil Sinclair/Peggy Rintoul <rinsin@globalserve.net>
> > To: sinclair@matrix.net <sinclair@matrix.net>
> > Date: Wednesday, June 07, 2000 9:44 AM
> > Subject: Re: Sinclair Dates & Appreciation
> >
> >
> > >Dear John;
> > >Everyday I think of you, and in a most positive way to be sure. When
> > >share the important dates in history we are connected this day with all
> > >those days that have gone before, linking the past and present in a
> > >contextual way. Today I note the anniversary of Robert Bruces death, so
> > >intimately tied into the family heritage. I applaud you for again
> > >and persistently keeping the shared interests moving forward in a
> positive
> > >direction. Now as for the granting of the Sinclair shield and heraldic
> > >symbols ...anyone???
> > >Neil Sinclair
> > >Toronto/PEI/Forever Argyll
> > >.
> > >----- Original Message -----
> > >From: "John S. Quarterman" <jsq@matrix.net>
> > >To: <sinclair@matrix.net>
> > >Sent: 7 June, 2000 3:19 AM
> > >Subject: Sinclair Dates
> > >
> > >
> > >>
> > >>    [1]Sinclair Dates:  June 7.
> > >>    In 1329: Robert I the Bruce d., King of Scots dies.
> > >>    [2]Tomorrow:  June 8.
> > >>    In 1376: Edward III d.,
> > >>    [3]King of England dies.
> > >>    In 1329: David II, King of Scots
> > >>    In 1042: Harthacnut end,
> > >>    [4]King of England ends reign
> > >>    In 793: Vikings sack Lindisfarne, Beginning of the Viking Age.
> > >>
> > >> References
> > >>
> > >>    1. http://www.mids.org/sinclair/timeline.html
> > >>    2. http://www.mids.org/sinclair/timeline.html
> > >>    3. http://www.angelfire.com/de/BobSanders/TIME1.html
> > >>    4. http://www.angelfire.com/de/BobSanders/TIME1.html
> > >> [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
> > >> [ To get off or on the list, see
> > >>
> > >
> > >[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
> > >[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
> > >
> >
> > [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
> > [ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html
> [ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
> [ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html

[ This is the Sinclair family discussion list, sinclair@mids.org
[ To get off or on the list, see http://www.mids.org/sinclair/list.html